2025 Texas sessionsRegular and both called sessions have ended. This index covers House and Senate bills, not resolutions. Statuses come from official reports.

← Back to bills

2025 · Regular session · House bill

HB4749

HB4749 lets a county with fewer than 1,000 residents draw eligible jurors from a neighboring county in the same judicial district.

Read bill highlights ↓

Official caption: Relating to reconstitution of the petit jury wheel and grand juror and petit juror qualifications and juror summoning in certain counties.

Signed by governorSource-checked explanation published

Official report lists House author(s): Landgraf. This does not identify sponsors or amendment drafters.

Report an error ↗

Bill explanation published · Version and amendment review scope is stated below · Individual amendment records may not be separately annotated.

Bill highlights

Selected points from the published explanation. Follow each point to its source-linked context; conditions and limits may matter.

Read the full explanation ↓

What does it do?

HB4749 lets a county with fewer than 1,000 residents draw eligible jurors from a neighboring county in the same judicial district. Signed June 20, 2025, it took effect September 1, 2025. Under the general statutory definition, population means the most recent federal decennial census, not a daily estimate.

The law covers both grand juries, which consider criminal accusations, and petit juries, which hear trials. A person from the qualifying neighboring county is not excluded simply for living and being qualified to vote there instead of in the summoning county. Other qualifications remain; the law does not allow noncitizens, underage people or otherwise disqualified people to serve.

For grand juries, the new provision authorizes random selection from a fair cross section of the qualifying neighboring population, with valid Texas driver’s-license or DPS identification and specified eligibility screening. For trial juries, the county may supplement its normal jury-wheel sources—the list from which prospective jurors are drawn—with neighboring-county voter lists and specified qualifying license/ID holders. Exempt-person registers and the voter suspense-list exclusion remain relevant. The Secretary of State’s legislative summary describes this source-list expansion; the final statute controls its details.

A district judge whose jurisdiction includes either a county served by at least nine district courts or a county below 1,000 population may direct the specified clerks, sheriffs or jury-room bailiffs to summon prospective jurors. This adds the small-county situation to the prior large-court-system authorization.

The new qualification rules apply to people summoned on or after September 1, 2025. People summoned earlier remain governed by the earlier qualification law. The act does not require every eligible small county to use outside-county jurors or move the trial itself to another county.

What changed along the way?

The introduced bill proposed a trial-jury expansion for counties below 25,000. The House committee substitute narrowed the threshold to 1,000, added grand juries and aligned neighboring-county provisions around the same-judicial-district requirement. The broader 25,000-person proposal did not become law.

The only indexed floor proposal, Sparks’s Senate amendment 1, was adopted May 26. It added the expanded judge-directed summoning provision, which survives in the final act. The House concurred May 29. See the history, amendment index and text index.

A separate 2025 law, HB2637, reorganized qualification and exemption provisions, including separate numbering for theft and felony disqualifications. The current trial-jury qualifications incorporate both laws. Renumbering does not mean HB4749 repealed those disqualifications.

For the full amendment record, open the official amendment index.

Official bill versions

Compare the published text versions in the official text index. A change is not attributed to a specific amendment here without a verified record.

Who could benefit—and who could bear the costs?

Small counties, litigants and defendants may benefit from a larger eligible pool when a local jury is difficult to assemble. Residents of qualifying neighboring counties may face jury-service obligations and travel; clerks and courts must manage the expanded lists and eligibility checks. The act does not guarantee shorter trials or quantify avoided delays.

The final fiscal note, May 27, 2025, anticipated no significant state or local fiscal impact, assuming costs could be absorbed within existing resources. It does not provide a new travel appropriation or a quantified individual cost estimate.

Official sources

Catalog report retrieved 2026-10-25. Check the official record for corrections or later changes.